Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Scourge of big teams - set quickmatch to like medium teams

23 posts, 770 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
Page of 2 (23 records)
sort


14 years ago
Big teams appear to be abomination of Zero-K.

Situation is paradoxical because most people actually prefer smaller games up to 7v7 yet we dont want to block big teams completely (and thats not what people want either).

Simple solution is-> use medium teams! Join medium teams or use quickmatch and set it to like medium teams best.
+0 / -0
Skasi
quote:
I keep telling everyone!

I keep telling everyone that I keep telling everyone stuff for ages. I'm getting bored of it.

Anyway. Medium team rooms are where everyone should be!
+0 / -0

14 years ago
The problem is that people have justifiably gotten scared of setting quickmatch to anything but "the server I'm currently playing on".
+0 / -0
14 years ago
What Pxtl said is a pretty big factor.
+0 / -0
There is some things very wrong with big teams. Why it is named as 5x5+ this is medium at best. First this confuses people they actually think that big games are not that big in preferences and secondly it greatly overlaps with medium teams.

If big teams would be 8x8+ or 7x7+ or even better 7x7 with top limit - 10x10(more = laaaag) all problems would be solved. Medium games would be medium (7x7 or 8x8 at max) and big games would be big - no confusion.

Why big games needs limit? Because those 13x13 or even bigger games breaks experience badly there is like half people laging out, newbs quiting. + Even with 4GB ram I sometimes hit the HDD. Those monstrous games really shouldnt be on juggler.

Really big games could still be hosted manually, but in reality people simply want to play and if you want to simply play you join bigest game.

I would modify juggler as this.

1v1
small teams 2x2-4x4
medium teams 5x5-7x7 or 8x8
big games 7x7 or 8x8 - 10x10

Dunno why there is such big overlaping it makes juggler pointless smallest big game 4x4 can be almost as biggest small game 5x5 -> just tick big games.

Licho you should really listen to this and try it on and see results, unless it is some technical problem like there must some buffer when someone leaves so window wont flash an so on, but now those buffers are too big, way too big.
+0 / -0


14 years ago
I would allow 4v4 in both small and medium teams, as it is the 'sweet spot'. capping big teams at 10v10 sounds reasonable.
+0 / -0


14 years ago
Any size limits must be n to 2xn because of splitting.

If you split 20 people host you end up with 5v5

Also juggler wont create game if people are belwo limit - for these two reasons big teams start at 5v5

Currently people dont respond well to split and they rush back to original host breaking whole idea of splitting players by skill level..
+0 / -0


14 years ago
just reducing the max size of the big teams room will pare away much of the cancer.
+0 / -0


14 years ago
People should be able to play medium teams without any risk by joining a big host and setting medium teams to +3.
+0 / -0


14 years ago
I still feel a need to point out that what we count as "small teams" here - that is, 4x4 -

Is the upper limit on game size in most "normal" games.

4x4 is actually huge enough to be huge. And what we call a "big game" is a true abomination.
+0 / -0


14 years ago
Then isn't it an achievement that more than 4v4 can work.
+0 / -0
If so you can add something to that 5x5+ to discourage to select this like "5x5+ can be lagy, uncheck if have slowdowns"(shorten this to 2 words). And to show correct choice add "recomended" word near medium teams for new user to know whats supposed to be best choice, otherwise bigger is better isint it?

Anarchid at least in my standard 4x4 = small game :) I actually probably would like 50x50 games on apropriate maps if technology would allow such :)

50x50 = oh no they rushed starlight we must counter it with our rushed detriminent fast before they saw it LOL :) - yeah this probably would be too much. Anyway nerf krow cost 5000 -> 6000.
+0 / -0
quote:
Then isn't it an achievement that more than 4v4 can work.

Technologically, it's an achievement. Socially, it's the reason this thread exists: because between technology and community, there is inability by latter to handle the former.

This post in four words: WHAT SCIENCE HAS DONE
+0 / -0


14 years ago
Not technologically. In terms of balance.
+0 / -0

14 years ago
just rename big team games to "ultra-cpu-animal-insane-games-or-lag"
+0 / -0

14 years ago
I like big games, I dislike troll maps, I dislike juggler.
Set quickmatch to this ;)
+0 / -0

14 years ago
I actually like playing small team games, but actually giving the Juggler a taste for small teams is a sure-fire way to get juggled into a game that won't start and missing the start of the bigger game.
+0 / -0

14 years ago
It should be more refined. 2v2 is different from 3v3 is different from 4v4. Those shouldn't be lumped together. Make a separate choice for each please.
+0 / -0

14 years ago
@Car, nobody uses "small teams" because they don't trust the juggler to put them into a small team game that will actually *start*. A large or medium team game can handle one or two players that aren't really in to play. A 1v1 game can be disbanded the moment one player rejects the game. The small teams game? They're the ones that get stuck as 1v2 with nobody willing to start it. Adding more options in that band will create even more "never-gonna-start" games.
+0 / -0


14 years ago
Pxtl thats nonsense, small teams will disband within 10s of geting < 4 people (if there are better alternatives)
+0 / -0
Page of 2 (23 records)